Who besides indoor/night sports shooters (who aren't going to buy the DF anyway) is working above ISO 6400? Seems like a tiny market.
I would think not, but I haven't used either.
D4 is better than the 610 at high iso over 3200....again the main diff is the ability to focus in low light. I use over 3200 and up to 6400 quite a bit and on fast moving targets...so the focus is just as important as the noise to me.
Agree over 6400 is small market....but having such extreme iso capability opens up the ability to use other than 1.4 1.8 lenses.
The D700 and D3 the only Nikon FF that has tempted me has been the D3S.....still waiting....I may just buy a refurbished D3S if I can find one.
I'll have one for sale before long... I don't need a pair of them any more. The D600 is doing a yeoman's job of stepping in for a second D3s with better color, better dynamic range, and better resolution.
For my dollar if ISO is an issue, the price point of the Df gets it into used D3s or D3x territory. For me the performance of those cameras is worth the additional money.
Above 6400 there isn't a huge amount of difference between the D610 and D4.
D3x is not a low light camera.
D3s would be a great choice but it's hard to find from a retailer at least of as of right now (just checked B&H, Adorama, and KEH and none have one in stock) and if it's for work I'd definitely want a warranty of some sort backing it up.
Actually I agree that dxomark is pretty worthless. One might get the idea that the Canon 5D3 is a bad camera, which it obviously is not.
But my point was that the D4 sensor in this camera can't possibly be worth a $1000 premium over the D610. I appreciate the insight that the D4 has better DR at high ISO, but $1000 better? Come on.
Regardless, I think Nikon is about to have a Sigma experience with the price tag.
I think different. The whole reason they went with the D4 sensor is because it's one of the best on the market, but it's not overkill for the everyday type of shooting that they intend the camera for. 24-36 MP is, let's be honest here, a bit much for almost every type of photography that you might want a "retro" or classic style camera for. Street photography, casual portraits and journalism, travel photography. Just about the only group of photogs who ought to be disappointed are the dedicated landscape shooters, but IMO Nikon dropped the ball for them in innumerable ways already with the DF. In short, this is a nearly perfect camera for many kinds of photographers, but indeed we really need a DF2 or a DFs to fully satisfy everyone...
Personally, I'm waiting for a DX version of the DF, with the D7100 / D5300 sensor. That would be INCREDIBLE for landscapes and travel / adventure photography IMO.
I think different. The whole reason they went with the D4 sensor is because it's one of the best on the market, but it's not overkill for the everyday type of shooting that they intend the camera for. 24-36 MP is, let's be honest here, a bit much for almost every type of photography that you might want a "retro" or classic style camera for. Street photography, casual portraits and journalism, travel photography.
I agree completely, but none of that means it commands a $1000 premium over the D610.
Personally, I'm waiting for a DX version of the DF, with the D7100 / D5300 sensor. That would be INCREDIBLE for landscapes and travel / adventure photography IMO.
I dunno, this type of camera seems to be aimed at the prime shooter, and APS-C stops making sense when you start shopping for wide and normal primes.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
I agree completely, but none of that means it commands a $1000 premium over the D610.
Neither Nikon or Canon have ever taken a sensor from a $6-8K flagship and slapped it in a similarly well-constructed semi-pro body for less than ~$3K. The 5D mk2 had a 1Ds mk3 sensor, the D700 had a D3 sensor, and both cost $3K. Admittedly the D700 was a bit more high-performance than the DF with respect to speed, and the 5D mk2 had video.
Either way, what commands the $1000 premium over the D610 is, in addition to the sensor, the build quality of the DF which is more on par with the D4 than any other camera. That, plus probably a tiny bit of "over-priced-ness" for the sake of nostalgia, kinda like the F6.
I dunno, this type of camera seems to be aimed at the prime shooter, and APS-C stops making sense when you start shopping for wide and normal primes.
...Then again, I've reviewed both the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 and the Rokinon 16mm f/2, and both lenses performed INCREDIBLY on a D7100. Like, good enough that anyone who doesn't need perfect ISO 6400 or 12800 shouldn't ever bother considering full-frame.
You put the D800 sensor in the Df and this camera makes more sense in the long haul. Have the D4 sensor in the D800 for the D700 replacement.
I agree, I would have rather seen a D710 with the D4 sensor and a D4 with the D610 or D800 sensor. But I think Nikon's goal with the DF was to "get back to the roots", and in their opinion their most prized sensor is the D4's sensor. Even though the other higher MP sensors are probably more appreciated and sought after by this generation.
My hope now is that they have additional high-end cameras up their sleeves for the next 12 months. Maybe a D400, maybe a D710, maybe a DX DF, maybe a DFX. But at least two of those options is coming in the next ~12 months...
Since there are so many photo experts on this, and other, forum I would ask to them a simple question. If you had a closet full of glass (Nikon of course), more than what my wife got in her china cabinet, what would you like to do buy, thinking of switch to a full frame (I do not even know why most of us need a full frame)?? Don't you think that the Df it would be the natural choice? And anybody, out there, did ever took a picture with one of those camera that you are now deriding? I mean a FM, F, FE, F3, EL and so fort and so on? Oh, don't let me forget that I used to do weddings with a Rolleiflex (no autofocus, no meter, no color color balance adjustment, etc.). And a Leica M4 is seating in my cabinet keeping company to my unused Nikon lenses and cameras.
I only wish that the Df didn't have the AF, meter, and other adjustments. To me is a beautiful camera, yes even aesthetically, and it doesn't look a like a boring black box indistinguishable from any other boring camera out there on the market.
Let me know your point of view because that camera is in my bucket list.
Since there are so many photo experts on this, and other, forum I would ask to them a simple question. If you had a closet full of glass (Nikon of course), more than what my wife got in her china cabinet, what would you like to do buy, thinking of switch to a full frame (I do not even know why most of us need a full frame)?? Don't you think that the Df it would be the natural choice? And anybody, out there, did ever took a picture with one of those camera that you are now deriding? I mean a FM, F, FE, F3, EL and so fort and so on? Oh, don't let me forget that I used to do weddings with a Rolleiflex (no autofocus, no meter, no color color balance adjustment, etc.). And a Leica M4 is seating in my cabinet keeping company to my unused Nikon lenses and cameras.
I only wish that the Df didn't have the AF, meter, and other adjustments. To me is a beautiful camera, yes even aesthetically, and it doesn't look a like a boring black box indistinguishable from any other boring camera out there on the market.
Let me know your point of view because that camera is in my bucket list.
Not for me. The one thing the Df has is the ability to use real old lenses. For 1k cheaper you get almost the same functionality with the D610, or even less with the D600. For a little bit more you can get the D800.
If this were a full frame mirrorless with a leaf shutter that I can use high speed flash with my studio lights different story.
Not for me. The one thing the Df has is the ability to use real old lenses. For 1k cheaper you get almost the same functionality with the D610, or even less with the D600. For a little bit more you can get the D800....
This is very true. If all you want is to be able to use your old AI-S lenses, well then yeah that's something I've been doing the whole time! Ever since I got a D200 / D300, I've been using AIS lenses and enjoying the full metering capability, focus confirmation, etc.
Honestly, I think the Df is simply more than that. It is for the photographer who does not just want to use old lenses, but also wants to use them on a body that has that similar classic, robust, "fine craftsmanship" feel to it. The D610 etc. simply aren't about that. The D610 is simply about offering the most affordable way possible to gain full-frame access to most Nikon lenses. The D800 is simply about offering the most performance and resolution possible, for working pro photogs who need all the latest bells and whistles.
The Df on the other hand, and the general allure of a "classic" style camera, involves more than just the design and features compared to the D610. It also involves the flagship-grade craftsmanship and reliability, which has never come cheap. I know that people are likening the Df to the D610 a lot simply because it has the same 1/4000 sec. shutter speed ceiling, but Nikon has repeatedly made it clear that the Df is more a flagship quality body than anything else.
Since there are so many photo experts on this, and other, forum I would ask to them a simple question. If you had a closet full of glass (Nikon of course), more than what my wife got in her china cabinet, what would you like to do buy, thinking of switch to a full frame (I do not even know why most of us need a full frame)?? Don't you think that the Df it would be the natural choice? And anybody, out there, did ever took a picture with one of those camera that you are now deriding? I mean a FM, F, FE, F3, EL and so fort and so on? Oh, don't let me forget that I used to do weddings with a Rolleiflex (no autofocus, no meter, no color color balance adjustment, etc.). And a Leica M4 is seating in my cabinet keeping company to my unused Nikon lenses and cameras.
I only wish that the Df didn't have the AF, meter, and other adjustments. To me is a beautiful camera, yes even aesthetically, and it doesn't look a like a boring black box indistinguishable from any other boring camera out there on the market.
Let me know your point of view because that camera is in my bucket list.
I think that you sound like the type of person Nikon is hoping will be interested in the Df. See my above discussion, however.
If you have a closet full of old Nikon lenses then the first question is still: are they mostly / all AI or AI-S, or are they mostly non-AI? Because any full-frame Nikon will offer compatibility with the AI / AI-S lenses, in fact I use them all the time. If you're a serious landscape photographer and care a lot about resolution and dynamic range, for example, you should consider the D610 and D800 for sure.
The Df is still awesome, though, and I would highly recommend it if you're at all into classic cameras / lenses in general. As we've discussed - it's not just about the compatibility, it's about the feel, the experience, the craftsmanship / quality.
I grew up with "classic" cameras. Shot many of them. Lusted after an F3HP. You know what made me forget all that nonsense? The F4s I bought. I finally had a camera that fit my big hands. Finally had a camera that would matrix meter properly. Finally had a camera that was BUILT for sports work. Finally had a camera that didn't feel like it was slipping out of my hands every time I needed to go one handed for a bit. There is absolutely NOTHING in the DF that I want. Save for the ability to use non-AI lenses. I still have a couple of those that are not converted. But beyond that, no thanks. I don't find the D4 sensor to be all that spectacular to be honest. The D600/D610 sensor is AMAZING. The D800 sensor is AMAZING as well.
I am glad the DF will find some limited audience. I am sure it's an itch that someone on Nikon's board had to scratch. I am curious to see if the D4s will make me part with my money. But it better catch or pass the 1Dx in performance (ISO, Focus, and fps) or my money is staying in my pocket.
Comments
Who besides indoor/night sports shooters (who aren't going to buy the DF anyway) is working above ISO 6400? Seems like a tiny market.
I would think not, but I haven't used either.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Wildlife bods
pp
Flickr
D4 is better than the 610 at high iso over 3200....again the main diff is the ability to focus in low light. I use over 3200 and up to 6400 quite a bit and on fast moving targets...so the focus is just as important as the noise to me.
Agree over 6400 is small market....but having such extreme iso capability opens up the ability to use other than 1.4 1.8 lenses.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
http://500px.com/Shockey
alloutdoor.smugmug.com
http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
I'll have one for sale before long... I don't need a pair of them any more. The D600 is doing a yeoman's job of stepping in for a second D3s with better color, better dynamic range, and better resolution.
perroneford@ptfphoto.com
Concert/event photographers.
D3x is not a low light camera.
D3s would be a great choice but it's hard to find from a retailer at least of as of right now (just checked B&H, Adorama, and KEH and none have one in stock) and if it's for work I'd definitely want a warranty of some sort backing it up.
I think different. The whole reason they went with the D4 sensor is because it's one of the best on the market, but it's not overkill for the everyday type of shooting that they intend the camera for. 24-36 MP is, let's be honest here, a bit much for almost every type of photography that you might want a "retro" or classic style camera for. Street photography, casual portraits and journalism, travel photography. Just about the only group of photogs who ought to be disappointed are the dedicated landscape shooters, but IMO Nikon dropped the ball for them in innumerable ways already with the DF. In short, this is a nearly perfect camera for many kinds of photographers, but indeed we really need a DF2 or a DFs to fully satisfy everyone...
Personally, I'm waiting for a DX version of the DF, with the D7100 / D5300 sensor. That would be INCREDIBLE for landscapes and travel / adventure photography IMO.
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
I agree completely, but none of that means it commands a $1000 premium over the D610.
I dunno, this type of camera seems to be aimed at the prime shooter, and APS-C stops making sense when you start shopping for wide and normal primes.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
You put the D800 sensor in the Df and this camera makes more sense in the long haul. Have the D4 sensor in the D800 for the D700 replacement.
Neither Nikon or Canon have ever taken a sensor from a $6-8K flagship and slapped it in a similarly well-constructed semi-pro body for less than ~$3K. The 5D mk2 had a 1Ds mk3 sensor, the D700 had a D3 sensor, and both cost $3K. Admittedly the D700 was a bit more high-performance than the DF with respect to speed, and the 5D mk2 had video.
Either way, what commands the $1000 premium over the D610 is, in addition to the sensor, the build quality of the DF which is more on par with the D4 than any other camera. That, plus probably a tiny bit of "over-priced-ness" for the sake of nostalgia, kinda like the F6.
...Then again, I've reviewed both the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 and the Rokinon 16mm f/2, and both lenses performed INCREDIBLY on a D7100. Like, good enough that anyone who doesn't need perfect ISO 6400 or 12800 shouldn't ever bother considering full-frame.
I agree, I would have rather seen a D710 with the D4 sensor and a D4 with the D610 or D800 sensor. But I think Nikon's goal with the DF was to "get back to the roots", and in their opinion their most prized sensor is the D4's sensor. Even though the other higher MP sensors are probably more appreciated and sought after by this generation.
My hope now is that they have additional high-end cameras up their sleeves for the next 12 months. Maybe a D400, maybe a D710, maybe a DX DF, maybe a DFX. But at least two of those options is coming in the next ~12 months...
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Since there are so many photo experts on this, and other, forum I would ask to them a simple question. If you had a closet full of glass (Nikon of course), more than what my wife got in her china cabinet, what would you like to do buy, thinking of switch to a full frame (I do not even know why most of us need a full frame)?? Don't you think that the Df it would be the natural choice? And anybody, out there, did ever took a picture with one of those camera that you are now deriding? I mean a FM, F, FE, F3, EL and so fort and so on? Oh, don't let me forget that I used to do weddings with a Rolleiflex (no autofocus, no meter, no color color balance adjustment, etc.). And a Leica M4 is seating in my cabinet keeping company to my unused Nikon lenses and cameras.
I only wish that the Df didn't have the AF, meter, and other adjustments. To me is a beautiful camera, yes even aesthetically, and it doesn't look a like a boring black box indistinguishable from any other boring camera out there on the market.
Let me know your point of view because that camera is in my bucket list.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Not for me. The one thing the Df has is the ability to use real old lenses. For 1k cheaper you get almost the same functionality with the D610, or even less with the D600. For a little bit more you can get the D800.
If this were a full frame mirrorless with a leaf shutter that I can use high speed flash with my studio lights different story.
This is very true. If all you want is to be able to use your old AI-S lenses, well then yeah that's something I've been doing the whole time! Ever since I got a D200 / D300, I've been using AIS lenses and enjoying the full metering capability, focus confirmation, etc.
Honestly, I think the Df is simply more than that. It is for the photographer who does not just want to use old lenses, but also wants to use them on a body that has that similar classic, robust, "fine craftsmanship" feel to it. The D610 etc. simply aren't about that. The D610 is simply about offering the most affordable way possible to gain full-frame access to most Nikon lenses. The D800 is simply about offering the most performance and resolution possible, for working pro photogs who need all the latest bells and whistles.
The Df on the other hand, and the general allure of a "classic" style camera, involves more than just the design and features compared to the D610. It also involves the flagship-grade craftsmanship and reliability, which has never come cheap. I know that people are likening the Df to the D610 a lot simply because it has the same 1/4000 sec. shutter speed ceiling, but Nikon has repeatedly made it clear that the Df is more a flagship quality body than anything else.
I think that you sound like the type of person Nikon is hoping will be interested in the Df. See my above discussion, however.
If you have a closet full of old Nikon lenses then the first question is still: are they mostly / all AI or AI-S, or are they mostly non-AI? Because any full-frame Nikon will offer compatibility with the AI / AI-S lenses, in fact I use them all the time. If you're a serious landscape photographer and care a lot about resolution and dynamic range, for example, you should consider the D610 and D800 for sure.
The Df is still awesome, though, and I would highly recommend it if you're at all into classic cameras / lenses in general. As we've discussed - it's not just about the compatibility, it's about the feel, the experience, the craftsmanship / quality.
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
I am glad the DF will find some limited audience. I am sure it's an itch that someone on Nikon's board had to scratch. I am curious to see if the D4s will make me part with my money. But it better catch or pass the 1Dx in performance (ISO, Focus, and fps) or my money is staying in my pocket.
perroneford@ptfphoto.com